woodguru

The problem being that you can't just say there was overwhelming fraud without proof and then act on it.

archie bunker Loc: Texas

Getting desperate, aren't ya? 🤣🤣

Strycker Loc: The middle of somewhere else.

Of course you can. Free speech is like that. At least it used to be.

Justice101

These indictments against Trump and others prove that the DemocRats are attempting to criminalize Freedom of Speech and private communications between lawyers and their clients.

Strycker Loc: The middle of somewhere else.

Worse than that. They are criminalizing daring to disagree with the current government. The first step to ens***ement is persecuting dissenters to establish fear about openly disagreeing with their masters.

Justice101

Very true. I bet that they will lock up people for peacefully protesting the government actions as well.
They want to censor us and keep us frightened as part of their tyrannical lust to retain control and power over the people.

Wonttakeitanymore

Based on t***h

woodguru

Try intelligent responses to direct topics there Bubba Bunker...Stone is in some deep doo doo with the video of the letter he was writing about overturning the e******n with f**e e*****rs turning it back to the state legislatures.

This is why the hard right remains so profoundly ignorant.

woodguru

Do you really believe courts of law work like that? That it can be stated that something took place without proof and the court is supposed to respond like it is real when it hasn't been proved? Legal actions are not taken without hard proof, and a lack of hard proof is where all the f**e e******n antics are based on

woodguru

There has never been protection for client attorney conversations where criminal activity is involved, not for a president of anyone else. Government attorneys under trump are there to represent the interests of the country not the president...something neither trump or his followers ever understood.

woodguru

Trump is not being prosecuted for disagreeing with the current government, he brought every one of his problems on himself

woodguru

I bet they won't, I also bet that your idea of peaceful protests are similar to J****** 6th, right?

Strycker Loc: The middle of somewhere else.

Doesn't matter what the court thinks. The law requires proof. It is the courts responsibility to provide proof of Trumps actual intent whether to o*******w a l********e e******n or to have the time to investigate what he believed was a illegitimate one. We shall see what hard proof the government provides as to Trumps motivations. Trump doesn't doesn't actually have to prove anything. Only establish doubt in the prosecutions claims and intentions. At least that would be true in a fair and impartial jury. Doubt Fulton county can provide a fair and impartial jury.

Stone's video only shows that Trump believed that the e******n was being r****d even before the actual e******n. Which it was. Again, Stone's video doesn't prove anything about Trumps intents or motivations.

Strycker Loc: The middle of somewhere else.

I bet they already have locked up people for peacefully protesting the government actions. By the definition from Democrats of "peaceful protest" that was applied throughout the "summer of love" certainly J** 6th was one of the more peaceful, less violent, less destructive and shortest of all the 2020 protests. Any reasonable person would assume that the definition of "peaceful protest" that was applied to Democrats that summer would also apply to themselves on J** 6th. You know.... That equal application of the law thing that this country used to actually follow.

Justice101

[quote=woodguru]There has never been protection for client attorney conversations where criminal activity is involved, not for a president of anyone else. Government attorneys under trump are there to represent the interests of the country not the president...something neither trump or his followers ever understood.[/quote

What criminal activity was discussed between Trump and his lawyers? Questioning the validity of the p**********l e******n and believing or saying the e******n was s****n or r****d isn't against the law.

https://journalistsresource.org/politics-and-government/appointing-federal-judges-attorneys-explainer/
A U.S. attorney is a prosecutor representing the Justice Department’s interests — the interests of the Executive Branch — in federal court. He or she is appointed by the president to one of the 94 judicial districts for a term of four years and is confirmed by the Senate. (Guam and Northern Mariana are served by a single U.S. attorney.) A president can remove a U.S. attorney at any time. In mid-2017, a large number were working in an acting capacity as they were either holdovers from the Obama administration or had not yet been confirmed by the Senate.